DETAILED ACTION
Claims 1-20 are pending, of which claims 13-20 have been withdrawn.
Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Specification
The disclosure is objected to because of the following informalities:
Paragraph [0031] refers to “fourth syngas stream 136.” Examiner believes that this should read “fourth syngas stream 126.”
Paragraph [0032] states that the third syngas stream 32 increases in temperature due to the shift reaction. Examiner believes that it is actually the fourth syngas stream 126 that undergoes the shift reaction, rather than the third syngas stream.
Appropriate correction is required.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b):
(b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph:
The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention.
Claims 1-12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention.
Claim 1 recites the limitation "the syngas stream" in lines 6-7. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner believes this limitation should refer to the “first syngas stream” and the claim is examined accordingly.
Claim 3 recites “the shifted syngas stream” in lines 1-2. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 9 recites the limitation “the hydrogen-depleted retentate stream” in line 1. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim.
Claim 10 recites the limitation “the syngas stream” in line 2. It is unclear if this is the same stream as the “first syngas stream” recited in line 1. For the purposes of examination, Examiner believes that the syngas stream referred to is the first syngas stream.
Claim 12 recites the limitation "the syngas stream" in lines 7-8. There is insufficient antecedent basis for this limitation in the claim. Examiner believes this limitation should refer to the “first syngas stream” and the claim is examined accordingly.
Claim 12 recites the limitation “the syngas stream” in line 15. It is unclear whether this limitation refers to the first, second, third, or fourth syngas streams, the first shifted syngas stream, or some other syngas stream. Examiner believes this limitation refers to the first shifted syngas stream, and the claim is examined accordingly.
Claims 2-11 depend from claim 1 and inherit the indefiniteness of claim 1.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action:
A person shall be entitled to a patent unless –
(a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention.
Claims 1-2, 4, 6-9, and 11 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by US 20090230359 (“Guvelioglu”).
Regarding claim 1, Guvelioglu teaches a process for producing syngas (see e.g. paragraph [0002]). The process includes reacting a reformer feed stream comprising a hydrocarbon feedstock and steam in the presence of a reforming catalyst to produce a syngas stream comprising hydrogen, carbon monoxide, and carbon dioxide (see e.g. paragraph [0016]). Guvelioglu teaches transferring heat from the first syngas stream to a water stream to produce a second syngas stream and a saturated steam stream (see e.g. paragraph [0090], describing that the steam is generated by heat exchange with the reformed gas mixture). Guvelioglu teaches that superheated steam is generated by heat exchange and that this heating fluid can also be the reformed gas mixture, which would generate a third syngas stream (see e.g. paragraph [0102], examiner notes that the intermediate gas stream referred to in this paragraph is the steam stream as described in paragraph [0092]). Guvelioglu further teaches reacting the third syngas stream in the presence of a shift catalyst to produce a first shifted syngas stream (see e.g. paragraph [0098]).
Regarding claim 2, Guvelioglu teaches that the reformer feed stream comprises at least a portion of the superheated steam stream (see e.g. paragraph [0101] describing that at least a portion of the generated steam is used in the reformer).
Regarding claim 4, Guvelioglu teaches that a portion of the superheated steam stream is used in the shift reactor, which would mean combining this stream with the third syngas stream (see e.g. paragraph [0026]).
Regarding claim 6, Guvelioglu teaches using a bypass of the heat exchanger to regulate steam formation (see e.g. paragraph [0090]). Bypassing the heat exchanger with a portion of the gas would require dividing the syngas stream. As Guvelioglu teaches that all of the syngas can be reacted in the shift reactor, the portion of syngas that bypasses the heat exchanger would still be combined with the third stream to form the shift feed gas.
Regarding claim 7, Guvelioglu teaches using a bypass of the heat exchanger to regulate steam formation (see e.g. paragraph [0090]). Passing less of the syngas through the heat exchangers would control the temperature of the syngas stream.
Regarding claim 8, Guvelioglu teaches that the reforming takes place in a plurality of catalyst containing reformer tubes (see e.g. paragraph [0112] describing that the steam reformer is a tube reformer).
Regarding claim 9, Guvelioglu teaches that a portion of a H2 depleted gas that is retained after passing through the PSA device is fed to the reformer, which would include combining this gas with the reformer feed (see e.g. paragraph [0148]).
Regarding claim 11, Guvelioglu teaches using a prereformer that catalytically reacts a prereformer hydrocarbon feed stream with steam (see e.g. paragraph [0072]). Guvelioglu teaches that the hydrocarbon feed stream can include natural gas, which contains methane (see e.g. paragraph [0048]).
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claims 3 and 12 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guvelioglu in view of US 20210002141 (“Feinstein”).
Regarding claim 3, Guvelioglu teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above, but does not teach transferring heat from the first shifted syngas stream to the mixed feed stream. However, Feinstein teaches a similar process where a hydrocarbon feedstock is reformed and then shifted with a shift reactor (see e.g. paragraph [0036]). Feinstein teaches that heat can be transferred from this shifted reformed gas to the hydrocarbon feedstock, which would make the recited second mixed feed stream further utilizing the heat of the system (see e.g. paragraph [0052]). Accordingly, prior to the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to transfer heat from the shifted reformed gas to the hydrocarbon feedstock as taught by Feinstein in order to more fully utilize the heat of the gases within the system.
Regarding claim 12, Guvelioglu teaches includes reacting a reformer feed stream comprising a hydrocarbon feedstock and steam in the presence of a reforming catalyst to produce a syngas stream comprising hydrogen, carbon monoxide, and carbon dioxide (see e.g. paragraph [0016]). Guvelioglu teaches transferring heat from the first syngas stream to a water stream to produce a second syngas stream and a saturated steam stream (see e.g. paragraph [0090], describing that the steam is generated by heat exchange with the reformed gas mixture). Guvelioglu teaches that superheated steam is generated by heat exchange and that this heating fluid can also be the reformed gas mixture, which would generate a third syngas stream (see e.g. paragraph [0102], examiner notes that the intermediate gas stream referred to in this paragraph is the steam stream as described in paragraph [0092]). Guvelioglu further teaches reacting the third syngas stream in the presence of a shift catalyst to produce a first shifted syngas stream (see e.g. paragraph [0098]). Guvelioglu teaches separating the shifted syngas into carbon dioxide enriched and depleted streams (see e.g. paragraph [0052]). The carbon dioxide depleted stream can be divided into hydrogen enriched and hydrogen depleted streams, including by use of membrane separation, which would utilize selective permeation to separate the stream into a hydrogen enriched product and a hydrogen depleted tail gas stream (see e.g. paragraphs [0052] and [0055]). Guvelioglu teaches that fuel is combusted to heat the reformer (see e.g. paragraph [0113]), and that the hydrogen depleted tail gas is used as part of the fuel (see e.g. paragraph [0114]). Guvelioglu teaches that the reformer feed stream comprises at least a portion of the superheated steam stream (see e.g. paragraph [0101] describing that at least a portion of the generated steam is used in the reformer).
Guvelioglu does not teach transferring heat from the first shifted syngas stream to the mixed feed stream. However, Feinstein teaches a similar process where a hydrocarbon feedstock is reformed and then shifted with a shift reactor (see e.g. paragraph [0036]). Feinstein teaches that heat can be transferred from this shifted reformed gas to the hydrocarbon feedstock, which would make the recited second mixed feed stream, which is then fed to the reformer, further utilizing the heat of the system (see e.g. paragraph [0052]). Accordingly, prior to the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art to transfer heat from the shifted reformed gas to the hydrocarbon feedstock as taught by Feinstein in order to more fully utilize the heat of the gases within the system.
Claim 10 is rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Guvelioglu in view of Tindall, et al., “Alternative Technologies to Steam-Methane Reforming”, Hydrocarbon Processing, November 1995, pp 75-81 (“Tindall”, cited in IDS of 1/23/24).
Regarding claim 10, Guvelioglu teaches the limitations of claim 1 as described above, but does not teach combining an oxygen-rich gas with the first syngas stream to partially oxidize and react the first syngas stream. However, Tindall teaches that an oxygen reformer can be included in a syngas system to partially oxidize the reformed gas with an oxygen feed (see e.g. paragraph spanning pages 75-76, starting “SMR/O2R…”). Tindall teaches that including this partial oxidation step advantageously allows for a smaller SMR, lower residual methane in the product, and purer syngas (see e.g. Table 3 on page 78). Accordingly, prior to the effective filing date of the invention, it would have been obvious to react the first syngas stream with an oxygen rich gas to partially oxidize the first syngas stream in order to reduce the necessary size of the SMR and obtain a purer product with less residual methane as taught by Tindall.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 5 is rejected under 35 USC §112. However, claim 5 would be allowable if the rejection is overcome and the claim is rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
Claim 5 recites that the temperature of the third syngas stream is between 750 °C and 1050 °C. The third syngas stream, as recited in claim 1, is the syngas stream after heat exchange to superheat the steam and that is reacted in the shift reactor. Guvelioglu teaches that the shift reactor can operate with gas at a temperature of 190° C to 500° C (see e.g. paragraph [0006]). Guvelioglu does not teach or fairly suggest that the shift reactor operates with gas at a temperature of over 750 °C.
Conclusion
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to ERIC S SHERMAN whose telephone number is (703)756-4784. The examiner can normally be reached Monday-Friday 8:30-5:00 ET.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Anthony Zimmer can be reached at (571)270-3591. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/E.S.S./Examiner, Art Unit 1736
/ANTHONY J ZIMMER/Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 1736